why the future of r/c aircraft isn't in trouble.

as much as mainstream television media tries portray anything small, flying with a camera negatively to the uneducated population there really isn't anything to worry about. negative fellow r/c pilots or even the FAA isn't going to in-act laws that will restrict R/c flying, camera or no camera commercially or recreational beyond what we have present day. i think we can thank google maps for it

google has been driving around our streets with their 360 camera since 2007. their satellite view has been around for over a decade. both of those images which are available to anyone complete with corresponding gps coordinates, perfect for someone some missiles and bad intentions if they wanna see it through. this never seems to bother anyone. why not? you can see in people's windows, read addresses, look in back yards and never once hear one negative comment about it from anyone.

the images google puts online for free open to everyone are no different then what we are capturing with our quad copters. the difference is quad copters stand out, draw attention. google's airplanes flying at 50,000 feet taking pictures of your property dont make a sound and no one really sure when it happens. same thing with google street car with the camera on the roof.. it's just 1 car among 100's of millions of other cars, they blend in.

everyone sees a quad copter. they stand out. they are not inconspicuous like googles surveillance systems no one has a problem with. the quad copter is IN YOUR FACE here is someone taking a picture of you plain as day. these amazing new little aircraft are a wake-up call to the general population not desensitized to yet. it's no different then facebook.

the government may try to single us out with re-inventing the definition of a "drone" but in reality it's no different then getting a 30 foot pole with a gopro duck taped to the end of it. or just always have your quad copter connected by a long string, now it's fly by wire and not radio controlled, the rules no longer apply to you now do they? what happens if you film someone committing a crime and your footage gets used to put a criminal behind bars? what then? the law makers know this and puts them in a position when it will cause them more problems then money it could make by passing new legislature.

to bring this spit balling idea full circle i think we are forever connected with google maps earth and street. if they can do it and it's ok then so can a r/c aircraft. i'll end by posing this question. if it becomes illegal for us, how does it stay legal for google and every other camera mounted on a building or on a phone already out there?

the images google puts online for free open to everyone are no different then what we are capturing with our quad copters. the difference is quad copters stand out, draw attention. google's airplanes flying at 50,000 feet taking pictures of your property dont make a sound and no one really sure when it happens.

Click to expand...

Google don't have satellites or fly planes to get their aerial imagery.
They simply buy existing aerial photography and satellite images from a thousand different sources.

no the don't. they hire a company that has a group of 5 planes that sync up and take the pictures with extremely powerful cameras from altitudes that are way up there. above commercial airliners. my question is... if they can do that legally, how can they put laws in place that only effect r/c aircraft that don't take news helicopters and anything else that takes picture from the air along with it? answer. they can't and better yet. how will they enforce it? make it a cops priority track down r/c pilots? I doubt it.

But when someone does something stupid ( and there seem to be plenty of examples of that ) and a plane has a collision with a copter or a fly away ends up crashing into a bunch of people then the whole discussion will take a major turn. Let's hope that never happens.

Bird strikes on planes happen a lot. It took a flock of geese to take down us airways forcing it to land in the hudson. One inspire isn't going to take down any plane big or small. If one does you can bet your ass someone is going to jail. But there is no way they can instantly "ground" all rc aircraft after one accident. You don't stop people from riding motorcycles after 1 person gets killed.

This isn't any different than the same theory people discuss nearly everyday...Okay, we can't ban knives because one person hurt themselves or killed someone. We can't ban guns because somebody murdered their wife with one. It's too broad. You're also comparing your average rc user to Google which is a highly unfair comparison. Google uses their imaging to benefit the public as a whole, for example I have no problem with what Google does because it helps me get directions to a place I need to go. You, me and almost any one else that uses multicopters (photography purposes) is for personal attention or monetary gain (Although you might think "i'm sharing my views with everyone" - Still personal) Remember Google changes the way that people discover and interact with information. What do you do with your multirotor that changes my life? (or vice versa)

The reason they can do the things they do is because if they are using planes, they are hiring a certified pilot to meet their goal. A job where regulations are already in place, thus they aren't breaking laws.

There's a negative connotation with multirotors because they are publically known as "drones" and when the public thinks drones they think of a predator or reaper...military technology, weaponized systems, surveillance equipment, the ability to seek and destroy, "when drones fly children die" type of thing.

Side note: I don't know where you get your info about Google but they aren't using "a group of 5 planes that sync up and take the pictures with extremely powerful cameras from altitudes that are way up there." It's purchased third-party from companies that own satellites and it's updated every few years, just like @Meta4 was saying. If they use planes they are used for densely populated areas, cities. They fly at altitudes up to about 2000' maybe. And also, you might have never seen one but a Google map vehicle sticks out like a sore thumb out of 100 million other cars.

As much as I disagree with your outlook...you are right, they aren't going anywhere and they aren't going to be grounded. They will be regulated though what that entails I don't know.

Side note: I don't know where you get your info about Google but they aren't using "a group of 5 planes that sync up and take the pictures with extremely powerful cameras from altitudes that are way up there." It's purchased third-party from companies that own satellites and it's updated every few years, just like @Meta4 was saying. If they use planes they are used for densely populated areas, cities. They fly at altitudes up to about 2000' maybe. And also, you might have never seen one but a Google map vehicle sticks out like a sore thumb out of 100 million other cars.

hehe well they do use planes. I've seen them with my own eyes. if you hit the tilt button on google maps, they use planes to get those pictures my friend. a satellite can't get that kind of an angle lol. nice try tho. anyway. back to my point now that we both agree they use planes to take pictures of houses... i'll pose my question for the 3rd time since everyone keeps dancing around it. if r/c aircraft get banned how will they continue to operate legally?

Staff Member

They have to be banned.to many FlyAway's three with my crap inspire1 just lucky no one was hurt or killed,and just waiting for an inspire1 to be sucked into an engine as a plane is taking off or goes thru the windscreen and kiills the pilot.

Click to expand...

Joined the forum on July 28, only 18 posts and nearly every one of them vitriolic against DJI.
Whilst I understand you may have a grievance against the company for your perceived faulty Inspire(s) can I suggest your energy is better directed at DJI directly rather than attempting to spread your venom randomly across the forum?

Staff Member

I beleive people have a right to know how dangerous the drones are.also that they are being mislead by dji.say what you may but it's a matter of time before a drone takes down an aircraft.three near miss in the new York area and one yesterday in pheonix.

Click to expand...

If there was an inherent problem with the Inspire we would be seeing a trend and would be hearing about it on this forum, which we are not.
The near misses reported are not rogue UAV's but rather mentally challenged individuals who fly their aircraft at rediculous altitudes or within controlled airspace and who should really be appearing on the Jeremy Kyle Show.
I fail to see how DJI are 'misleading' individuals.

I beleive people have a right to know how dangerous the drones are.also that they are being mislead by dji.say what you may but it's a matter of time before a drone takes down an aircraft.three near miss in the new York area and one yesterday in pheonix.

Click to expand...

no inspire or phantom will ever take down an aircraft. If they did happen to collide with a commerical airliner the drone would be instantly obliterated and unless the pilot saw it he wouldnt even know he hit one. Even if it went through the engine it wouldnt cause a crash, jet engines are designed to ingest birds that have 10X the mass of a plastic inspire and keep flying, its nothing more than fear mongering BS. Theres never any actual video/photo proof of these so called interfering drones. They might possibly cause some minor damage to a small single engine aircraft if it hit the prop or the windscreen, but i have a few pilot friends who say it wouldnt do anything but make the drone owner sad if it hit their wing or somewhere else, lol.

Also 99.9 percent of flyaways and erratic flights problems are due to pilot error/improper calibration/moving the unit during the power on self test. While im not a huge DJI fan myself since they cant seem to release a bug free firmware/ app version or implement the features on the 3K inspire that are available on the 700$ phantom to say they are dangerous or misleading anyone is completely ludicrous. There are many improvements they could/should make but overall if you have half a clue what youre doing they fly quite well unless you got stuck on buggy firmware versions. At least now they finally added the option to revert to previous which will help lots of people keep flying if they have issues on the latest version. Im hopeful that dji will step up their game soon due to the increasing competition in the drone market, or else some other company will rise to the top and provide a better quality product.

Side note: I don't know where you get your info about Google but they aren't using "a group of 5 planes that sync up and take the pictures with extremely powerful cameras from altitudes that are way up there." It's purchased third-party from companies that own satellites and it's updated every few years, just like @Meta4 was saying. If they use planes they are used for densely populated areas, cities. They fly at altitudes up to about 2000' maybe. And also, you might have never seen one but a Google map vehicle sticks out like a sore thumb out of 100 million other cars.

hehe well they do use planes. I've seen them with my own eyes. if you hit the tilt button on google maps, they use planes to get those pictures my friend. a satellite can't get that kind of an angle lol. nice try tho. anyway. back to my point now that we both agree they use planes to take pictures of houses... i'll pose my question for the 3rd time since everyone keeps dancing around it. if r/c aircraft get banned how will they continue to operate legally?

Click to expand...

I asked my friend who is a CEO at Google and they use planes in most locations.............

If a drone hit the leading edge of a small plane wing, it would cause a large, large dent. the leading edge is not meant to hit anything, and isn't as strong as you might think (ask anyone that has bumped a wing putting a plane into a hanger, I have)

As far as jets, if it hit the jet itself it wouldn't take it down, however a jet engine can take a large bird a lot easier than it can take in the metal in a drone, specifically the battery. Knocking out an engine doesn't mean the plane will crash, but it will cause an emergency and if it were to happen at take off or landing, yes it could crash (take off and landing have the plane low and slow, the two things that make a little problem a really big problem)

i'll end by posing this question. if it becomes illegal for us, how does it stay legal for google and every other camera mounted on a building or on a phone already out there?

Click to expand...

1. Google don't do the aerial photography and satellite images themselves. They buy in existing imagery from a thousand different sources. Google cleverly put them together into Google Earth and publish it on the web. Lok around Google Earth a bit and it's obvious that their imagery comes from a multitude of sources. They usually indicate this in the bottom centre of the screen.
2. How is this legal? There is no law against people taking photos from planes. Just like down on the ground where you can legally photograph whatever you like if it's out in the open and publicly visible.

as much as mainstream television media tries portray anything small, flying with a camera negatively to the uneducated population there really isn't anything to worry about. negative fellow r/c pilots or even the FAA isn't going to in-act laws that will restrict R/c flying, camera or no camera commercially or recreational beyond what we have present day. i think we can thank google maps for it

google has been driving around our streets with their 360 camera since 2007. their satellite view has been around for over a decade. both of those images which are available to anyone complete with corresponding gps coordinates, perfect for someone some missiles and bad intentions if they wanna see it through. this never seems to bother anyone. why not? you can see in people's windows, read addresses, look in back yards and never once hear one negative comment about it from anyone.

the images google puts online for free open to everyone are no different then what we are capturing with our quad copters. the difference is quad copters stand out, draw attention. google's airplanes flying at 50,000 feet taking pictures of your property dont make a sound and no one really sure when it happens. same thing with google street car with the camera on the roof.. it's just 1 car among 100's of millions of other cars, they blend in.

everyone sees a quad copter. they stand out. they are not inconspicuous like googles surveillance systems no one has a problem with. the quad copter is IN YOUR FACE here is someone taking a picture of you plain as day. these amazing new little aircraft are a wake-up call to the general population not desensitized to yet. it's no different then facebook.

the government may try to single us out with re-inventing the definition of a "drone" but in reality it's no different then getting a 30 foot pole with a gopro duck taped to the end of it. or just always have your quad copter connected by a long string, now it's fly by wire and not radio controlled, the rules no longer apply to you now do they? what happens if you film someone committing a crime and your footage gets used to put a criminal behind bars? what then? the law makers know this and puts them in a position when it will cause them more problems then money it could make by passing new legislature.

to bring this spit balling idea full circle i think we are forever connected with google maps earth and street. if they can do it and it's ok then so can a r/c aircraft. i'll end by posing this question. if it becomes illegal for us, how does it stay legal for google and every other camera mounted on a building or on a phone already out there?

Click to expand...

Great informative post thanks - keep in mind that Google does ace out all faces and tags which is for privacy reasons.

Bird strikes on planes happen a lot. It took a flock of geese to take down us airways forcing it to land in the hudson. One inspire isn't going to take down any plane big or small. If one does you can bet your ass someone is going to jail. But there is no way they can instantly "ground" all rc aircraft after one accident. You don't stop people from riding motorcycles after 1 person gets killed.

Click to expand...

Your dead nuts on. If we were really worried about people getting killed we would've ban guns like the Aussies did in 96. Nope this is just the FAA in crisis mode, because "drone" is associated with death on our nightly news. Some people look askance at drone operators.
I told an elderly lady here in Tucson that I had a drone, I got the dirtiest look. Anyway, we need to hang tight and make sure AMA keeps the lobbying pressure on the meatheads in congress.